Total Pageviews

Tuesday, April 2, 2019

The junk science used for scaremongering about the Flint, Michigan water "crisis"

When something unintelligible 
is expressed with high level 
mathematics, and appears to 
be complicated science,
most people assume it's 
“over their head”.

Too complicated for them
to ask questions.

Government agencies argue
that we should “err on the side 
of safety”. 

Then they base public policy 
on tiny probabilities, that an
implausible event might happen.

The EPA manipulates words 
and numbers to deceive the 
public, and keep fear alive.




The public was fooled 
into believing drinking 
water-related cases 
of lead poisoning 
had reached 
crisis proportions 
in Flint, Michigan, 
after the city
water source was 
changed in 2014.

Flint is less than 
a one hour drive 
from where I live, 
in Bingham Farms,
Michigan.




From a March 13, 2018 article 
in The Journal of Pediatrics 
(Gomez et al., 2018)
“Blood-Lead Levels of Children 
in Flint Michigan: 2006-2016”:

“…changes in GM 
Blood Lead Levels (BLLs)
in young children 
in Flint, Michigan, 
during the Flint River 
water exposure 
did not meet the level of 
an environmental emergency
… not a single BLL 
from a child ≤5 years of age 
attained a BLL 
of 45 µg/dL (or greater), 
the minimum level 
for which the current 
Centers for Disease Control
(CDC) guidelines suggest 
initiation of chelation therapy, 
during the switch 
to the Flint River 
water source. "

"In addition, no child 
was hospitalized in the area 
for acute or chronic lead toxicity 
during this time frame.”




BLLs in Flint,
and the rest of the U.S.,
have been declining 
for decades.

During that time,
the CDC and EPA 
have continually 
lowered their official 
“safe” BLL’s 
(currently at 5 µg/L)
to keep the fear alive. 

Any BLLs in Flint that exceeded 
those official “safe” levels were
called "lead poisoning" by the press.



From the Journal of Pediatrics again:
(Gomez et al, 2018):

“Between 1960 and 1990, 
[CDC’s} BLL reference 
concentration was gradually 
lowered from 60 µg/dL 
to 25 µg/dL. 

In 1991, the CDC 
lowered the reference 
concentration to 10 µg/dL 
and in 2012 to the current 
value of 5 µg/dL. 

This reference concentration, 
originally intended by the CDC 
as a tool to identify children 
at greater risk of lead poisoning, 
has been frequently misinterpreted 
as a definitive threshold
of lead toxicity, or poisoning.”



Forty years ago, 
78% of Americans 
had BLLs ≥ 10 µg/dL 
(NHANES II, 1976-1980). 

With no negative effects !



The concept of objective 
adverse health effects 
caused by measured
chemical exposure
( real science )
has been replaced 
by subjective
“levels of concern”
( junk science ).

"Concern" can exist without 
any exposure measurements,
or any adverse reactions !